June 4, 2004

Veracity Series #7: Tenet Down - Many More To Go

Hello everyone

This is probably one of the most hard-hitting compilations I've put together in a long time. Believe me, I would rather spend time outside enjoying the springtime beauties of nature in my garden or kayak, but what is coming to the surface in growing, revulsive masses of ever more hair-raising horror cannot be simply ignored. We need to be aware of what's wrong in order to contribute towards making major global change happen.

The whole bunch of corrupted politicians and operatives responsible for these criminal acts against humanity and all life must be dethroned and replaced by untainted Life-protecting, caring people. It is pointless to celebrate the liberation of Europe 60 years ago from the oppression of Nazi killers when the same actions are being carried on today with near complete impunity in the face of the whole world. Whether it is in Iraq, Gaza, Darfur, Chechnya or anywhere else, all desecration of human life and deliberate wanton destruction of our global environment must be brought to a swift end and remedial actions urgently implemented.

In global Oneness and compassionate actions, Peace, Love and Light will prevail!

Jean Hudon
Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator

Free subscription to such compilations by sending a blank email to

This compilation is archived at

NOTE: I recommend you go at the archived copy of this compilation - through clicking on the word HERE above - to see a quite unique picture that was created to show who is mainly responsible for the death of American soldiers in Iraq - 684 as of June 4, 2004 - plus 51 other dead coalition soldiers. Add to this 4,327 other U.S. soldiers "wounded in action"... All this according to Iraq Coalition Casualty Count at . For the civilian casualties see "Ordinary Iraqis killed: 11,500 and not counting" below.

Worthy of Your Attention

Revealing Contrail (Chemtrail?) satellite picture


1. Shoot to Kill Protesters Ordered at G8 Summit in Georgia
2. Ordinary Iraqis killed: 11,500 and not counting
3. The Marine's tale: 'We killed 30 civilians in six weeks. I felt we were committing genocide'
4. American atrocities against humanity in Iraq
5. Digital Watermarks Prove Berg and Abuse Cameras Were the Same
6. Army, CIA want torture truths exposed
7. ''Fahrenheit 9/11'' finds domestic distributor
8. Happy 87th Birthday President Kennedy
9. Report: Iraq being plundered
11. Put it to the Politicians

See also:

Down Goes Tenet (04 June 2004 - By William Rivers Pitt)
The news over the last week or so has been grim for the White House. Ahmad Chalabi, Bush's favorite Iraqi, has been accused of passing high-level intelligence secrets to Iran. Questions as to who could have coughed up those secrets have been auguring towards Defense Department officials Douglas Feith and William Luti, the two men who ran the secretive Office of Special Plans (OSP). The OSP, organized for the express purpose of massaging intelligence data on the threat posed by Iraq so as to justify the already-made war decision, was fueled in no small part by the data provided by Chalabi. This story unfolded under the deepening gloom of the Abu Ghraib torture scandal, which appears to be spreading far beyond Iraq, and threatens to subsume a number of high-ranking officials. Late Wednesday night, a wire report appeared stating that George W. Bush was seeking legal advice on how to protect himself from the looming investigation into who in the White House outed the name of CIA agent Valerie Plame. According to the report, Bush was "ready to cooperate" with the investigation - an interesting comment, considering the fact that the investigation has been going on for months, and that his people have been stonewalling the investigation across the board. When the President needs a lawyer, it is usually a sign that there is blood in the water. Then, on Thursday, CIA Director George Tenet resigned his position. The news was delivered by George W. Bush just before he boarded a plane to absorb a beating from our former European allies. Whither goes Tenet? Why did he resign? The official version holds that he quit for "personal reasons," and has intended to leave for a while now. It was put forth that perhaps this Clinton holdover never quite fit the Bush administration mold. Some said he was quitting because no weapons of mass destruction were found in Iraq. Some used the word 'fired' to describe his departure. In the end, however, it appears Tenet bailed out to save George W. Bush. CLIP

Bush Seeks Lawyer in Probe Over CIA Leak (June 2)
Washington - President Bush has sought a lawyer to represent him in the criminal probe into who was responsible for a leak that was seen as retaliation against a critic of the Iraq war, the White House said on Wednesday. "The president has had discussions with an outside attorney, and in the event that he needs advice he would retain him," said White House spokesman Allen Abney, naming the lawyer as Jim Sharp. A federal grand jury has been hearing testimony since January from administration and government officials in an attempt to establish who leaked the name of CIA operative Valerie Plame to the media last year.

Intelligence Agents Accused of Abuse at Four More Iraqi Prisons

Houston, We Have a Problem (May 25)
Halliburton - the "most unpatriotic corporation in America" - This week, twelve current and former truckers for the Halliburton subsidiary Kellog, Brown and Root told Knight-Ridder that they made runs through some of the most dangerous areas of Iraq with empty payloads. The truckers called their non-existant cargo "sailboat fuel." The useless trips cost taxpayers tens of thousands of dollars, if not more. The allegations are just the tip of the iceberg in what critics call a multi-billion dollar scheme by Halliburton, the world's second largest energy services company, to illegally profit from the war in Iraq. Our friends at CorpWatch have a new report detailing the company's dubious operations:Houston, May 18, 2004: CorpWatch today released an alternative annual report on Halliburton corporation, the day before its shareholders meet for its annual meeting, that charges that the company is the "most unpatriotic corporation in America". "Houston, We Have A Problem" is an in-depth, hard-hitting report that provides a detailed look at Halliburton's military and energy operations around the world as well as its political connections. It includes a series of recommendations for the company and its shareholders as well as for the United States policymakers.Halliburton is one of the 10 largest contractors to the U.S. military, with several lucrative deals in Iraq. It earned $3.9 billion from the armed forces in 2003, a whopping 680 percent more than in 2002, when the company brought in just $483 million from the military. "Houston: We Have a Problem," also provides numerous case studies of Halliburton's business dealings with some of the most brutal and corrupt regimes in the world, including Burma, Iran, Kazakhstan, Libya, Nigeria, and with Iraqi dictator and former president, Saddam Hussein. CLIP

Neo-Con Collapse in Washington and Baghdad Analysis - By Jim Lobe
WASHINGTON, Jun 1 (IPS) - Fourteen months after reaching the zenith of their influence on U.S. foreign policy with the invasion of Iraq, neo-conservatives appear to have fallen entirely out of favour, both within the administration of President George W Bush and in Baghdad itself. CLIP

John Kerry attacks Bush's record on counterterrorism (May 28)
Kerry calls for MORE Homeland Security & police state

Pending Draft Legislation Targeted for Spring 2005
The Draft will Start in June 2005 - Go! There is pending legislation in the House and Senate (twin bills: S 89 and HR 163) which will time the program's initiation so the draft can begin at early as Spring 2005 -- just after the 2004 presidential election. The administration is quietly trying to get these bills passed now, while the public's attention is on the elections, so our action on this is needed immediately. $28 million has been added to the 2004 Selective Service System (SSS) budget to prepare for a military draft that could start as early as June 15, 2005. Selective Service must report to Bush on March 31, 2005 that the system, which has lain dormant for decades, is ready for activation. CLIP

Exiled Allawi Was Responsible for 45-minute WMD Claim (29 May 2004)
The choice of Iyad Allawi, closely linked to the CIA and formerly to MI6, as the Prime Minister of Iraq from 30 June will make it difficult for the US and Britain to persuade the rest of the world that he is capable of leading an independent government. He is the person through whom the controversial claim was channelled that Iraqi weapons of mass destruction could be operational in 45 minutes. CLIP

Terror Warning Surprises Homeland Security Dept. (May 28, 2004)
WASHINGTON -- The Homeland Security Department was surprised by the announcement Wednesday by Attorney General John Ashcroft and FBI Director Robert Mueller that a terrorist attack was increasingly likely in the coming months, officials said. The department, created a year after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, is charged with issuing terrorism warnings to the public, and tension arose when Ashcroft and Mueller effectively took over that role at a news conference Wednesday when they said al-Qaida is preparing an attack inside the United States. Officials said the Homeland Security Department knew in advance about the news conference but expected it to focus on seven suspects with ties to al-Qaida who were wanted for arrest or questioning. Department officials were caught off guard when Ashcroft went further and warned that al-Qaida "is ready to attack the United States."

Be afraid...but at least know why (May 26)
The big news right now is the FBI warning that at some unspecified time using some unspecified method an unspecified place will suffer a terrorist attack. Some are understandably suspicious that this is the first of several tactics various agencies and departments will employ at the direction of the administration to garner support for the flailing Bush re-election campaign.

More "Washington whispers" about possible pre-election terrorist attack
"In the 'Washington Whispers' section of this week’s US News & World Report, columnist Paul Bedard reports: 'White House officials say they’ve got a 'working premise' about terrorism and the presidential election: It's going to happen.' Bedard quotes a top administration official as asserting, 'We assume an attack will happen leading up to the election,' and that it will happen in Washington, D.C. Bedard continues by noting, 'Unclear is the political impact, though most Bushies think the nation would rally around the president [sic]... There is an obvious question raised by these discussions: Are top officials in the Bush administration planning to allow such an attack in order to reap political advantage? Anyone who would dismiss this possibility as an outlandish conspiracy theory underestimates both the depth of the administration’s crisis and the criminality of those who set its policy. This is a government that came to office by means of theft and intimidation, gaining power only through the intervention of the Supreme Court on an explicitly anti-democratic basis." (...) What worked once may work again. This is a government composed of indictable war criminals who would think nothing of sacrificing the lives of thousands or hundreds of thousands of people in pursuit of its agenda. Indeed, such sacrifices have already been made and will be made again.It is also an administration that confronts an intractable crisis. The revelations of torture of Iraqi prisoners have been met with worldwide revulsion. The administration’s Iraq policy is in shambles as the US occupation confronts the opposition of the vast majority of the Iraqi people. Support within the United States for the Bush administration is at an all-time low, even according to opinion polls that generally overestimate Bush’s popularity. On the economic front, the government faces the prospect of rising inflation spurred by escalating gasoline prices over the coming months. There is nothing more dangerous for the ruling elite than a political debacle combined with an economic crisis. And there is nothing more dangerous for the American people than a ruling class in panic. (...) The quoted Washington official’s statement warning that the US “won’t be like Spain” can be interpreted in two ways. Either the Bush administration is determined to manipulate a terror attack to benefit the Republican Party in the elections, or it may use such an attack to call off the elections altogether.

New York Times’ Safire predicts “major terror attack in the US” on eve of 2004 election

Navy to Deploy Carrier Groups to Test Rapid Readiness (BUT WHY NOW???)
A major exercise soon to be underway will have a large part of the Navy fleet deploying out of Norfolk. WAVY News 10 has learned the Navy is sending seven carrier strike groups out to sea. The exercise is designed to test the Navy's new rapid deployment readiness. Several Norfolk-based carrier strike groups will participate. The USS George Washington is already deployed. Two others, the USS Enterprise and USS Harry S Truman will leave soon. Other carriers involved in the exercise include the USS John F. Kennedy, the USS John S. Stennis, and the USS Ronald Reagan - which left Norfolk on Thursday. While the Navy won't say where the seven carrier groups are going, the carriers not already deployed are expected to be gone for only one to two months. Click here to view this video report:

Excellent interview with Robert Fisk, Journalist (Recommended by>Hugh Spencer)
(...) McNaught: How much worse is it going to get? Fisk: We don’t need to know what the Pentagon’s thinking is, we can see what it is: Think of something for tomorrow! It’s one day at a time now, everything has fallen aside. Liberation, reconstruction of democracy – it’s finished! There maybe some people like the President who haven’t grasped that fact, but on the ground they know it. The State department, soldiers, most of the British forces there, they speak frankly in private that it’s over, it’s all gone. (...) But we are doing everything wrong everything we do is exacerbating this country towards what could be a civil war, which I suspect some people would like. It’s only a matter of time before we hear our leaders who led us into this appalling war say: We gave them every chance, but the people don’t deserve it. (...) The problem for the Americans in Iraq is that they’ve got to leave. There’s no future for them now, they’re fighting an insurgency against everybody except the Kurds, so they must leave. And they will leave. But they CAN’T leave, because if they DO leave, the whole power and politics of the United States and this presidency is torn to pieces. You ask about why the Americans are in Iraqi, they’re there for oil, on the grounds that if Iraq exported carrots they wouldn’t be there. I was doing a story about the killing of a westerner on the street. And all of a sudden a US convoy came past, the whole ground shook. I guess two thousand years ago it would have been the Roman Army, and I began to realise then that I was watching the physical symbol of something which drives the US into these adventures, and that is the sheer almost messianic need to project physical power. The need to project it. “We can go to Baghdad, and to show you, we’ll go there.” It didn’t need a political reason – the power IS the reason. McNaught: It’s power on steroids, isn’t it? Fisk: It’s bigger than steroids. Power backed up by awesome technology, and hopeless semantics, total injustice and absolute abysmal powers of analysis on the part of decision makers. CLIP

Wal-Mart Welfare (May 28, 2004)
A new report [PDF] released from Good Jobs First this week shows that Wal-Mart, the world's largest retailer, has received more than $1 billion in economic development subsidies from states for its stores and distribution centers. The subsidies have come as many states are forced by White House tax cuts and reductions in federal grants to make tough budget decisions. A report by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities shows states are cutting subsidies for publicly funded health insurance, childcare, federal employment, both higher and lower education, and programs aimed at public safety and people with disabilities ˆ all this while ponying up taxpayer dollars to subsidize a retailer that took in more than$200 billion in revenue and netted nearly $9 billion in profits last year,even as it paid workers near-poverty wages, drove out local businesses and violated environmental regulations.

Report: 1 of Every 75 U.S. Men in Prison (27 May 2004)
Washington - America's inmate population grew by 2.9 percent last year, to almost 2.1 million people, with one of every 75 men living in prison or jail. The inmate population continued its rise despite a fall in the crime rate and many states' efforts to reduce some sentences, especially for low-level drug offenders.

March 2004 / In the year 2000, Ralph Nader strapped political dynamite onto himself and walked into one of the closest elections in American history hoping to blow it up. He wanted to punish the Clinton-Gore Democrats for having betrayed him and the causes he believes in. His primary campaign mission was defeating Al Gore, but Nader concealed this from his supporters, even as he went after votes in swing states like Florida. On the day after election day, when everyone else was grim, and many Democrats were furious at him, Ralph Nader was a happy man.The following essay presents evidence for this large claim and describes how I first learned this in the fall of 2000. Since the election, political discussions about Nader's campaign have often focused on its electoral effect. Did Nader's 97,000 votes in Florida defeat Al Gore making George W. Bush president? Most observers seem to agree that they did, but others insist that many factors defeated Gore. However, independent of the effect of the Nader campaign on the election results, one can ask about what Nader wanted to have happen. Now that he has decided to run again, in what promises to be another very close election, it is worth examining what Ralph Nader intended the last time.

US May Be Violating International Ban on Biological Weapons (May 22, 2004)
WASHINGTON - Arms control advocates are warning the Bush administration that proposed research for a new Homeland Security center may violate an international ban on biological weapons and encourage other countries to follow. In a statement posted on the Internet, three arms control experts say proposals for the National Biodefense Analysis and Countermeasures Center, established by Congress last year, appear to flout the prohibition on development of bioweapons. "The rapidity of elaboration of American biodefense programs, their ambition and administrative aggressiveness and the degree to which they push against the prohibitions of the Biological Weapons Convention are startling," the authors said. The writers are Milton Leitenberg, an arms control expert at the University of Maryland; James Leonard, who headed the U.S. delegation that negotiated the bioweapons ban in 1972; and former U.N. weapons inspector Richard Spertzel. Their critique, posted by the journal Politics and the Life Sciences stemmed from a presentation last winter by Lt. Col. George W. Korch Jr., deputy director of the Homeland Security's center, to be housed on the grounds of Fort Detrick, Md. Korch said in February that the center might study whether deadlier bacteria and viruses could be developed to ensure that U.S. defenses would be effective among the most dangerous pathogens. Other areas to be studied could include developing aerosols that contain deadly germs and new methods of delivering germ-warfare agents. CLIP


Forwarded by

From: "Claudia Slate for Dakota Technics">
Subject: Shoot to Kill Protesters Ordered at G8 Summit in Georgia
Date: 28 May 2004

by Dandelion - May 27, 2004

Pacifica News and the AP have both stated in the last two days that there is potential for the use of Lethal Force at the G8, DNC, and RNC this summer. Read on...

On May, 25 2004 Pacifica News reported on their daily news broadcast about the current orders being given to the police that will be responding to the G8 conference in Georgia this year. According to the broadcast, the governor of Georgia (as of May 25th), was going through the motions of declaring a "state of emergency" during the G8 protest. This so called "state of emergency" would allow the police in the entire state to break up, any and all "gatherings of people" to protest any event. However, the suspension of the first amendment is not the only card up this governor’s sleeve.

In correlation with this "state of emergency" the commander of the police forces has ordered a: "SHOOT TO KILL" order, that will pertain to all individuals that the police themselves feel are "threatening" the lives of "world leaders" that will be gathering for the event. This order will only go into effect if the governor is capable of issuing a state of emergency. But, you did hear me right, "SHOOT TO KILL."

Upon hearing this my partner and I were shocked to say the least. Both of us want to be in Georgia this summer, but money is not permitting a cross country trip. Immediately upon hearing this new’s both of us attempted to brush it under the rug with as many excuses as possible, things like:

"They’d never do that"
"I bet it is only if the protesters break through a certain perimeter"
"This is just a scare tactic"

We were shocked, to say the least.

That was until today. According to the Associated Press On May 25th John Ashcroft made a press release to the public about potential terrorist attacks that will be carried out this summer. Ashcroft stated that this threat is highly probable, and that there is a grave danger of our nation being struck this summer. During this press release he stated that there were three high priority targets that would be considered major threats. These targets were: THE DEMOCRATIC NATIONAL CONVENTION, THE REPUBLICAN NATIONAL CONVENTION, and THE G8 CONFERENCE. The point of this is not to debate whether or not Al Qaida will strike these targets, but rather is to look at this announcement in terms of what it means to the activist community. By announcing that the G8 conference is an Al Qaida target, Ashcroft increased the chances for the governor of Georgia to approve imposing a state of emergency during the conference. This would then result in the "shoot to kill" order being instated while the meeting is taking place.



Ordinary Iraqis killed: 11,500 and not counting

by David Randall,
(...) Whatever our positions on Iraq, we are morally obliged to assess the actual human cost of our involvement there. One powerful approach is to estimate “excess mortality”, which is the difference between the actual deaths observed in a country and the mortality expected for a properly run, peaceful society with the same demographics. The total excess mortality in Iraq, calculated using United Nations data, is 5.2 million since 1950 and 1.5 million for the period 1991–2004. The huge excess mortality in Iraq since 1950 is similar in magnitude to that of the Jewish Holocaust (six million victims) and the “forgotten” manmade World War II Bengal Famine (four million Muslim and Hindu victims). (...) Mass mortality in a conquered population also constitutes a war crime, as well as a humanitarian tragedy. The actual Iraqi death toll is not being reported and publicly discussed. Ignoring mass human mortality in Iraq amounts to holocaust denial.

Up to 11,147 Iraqi civilians reported dead so far according to Iraq Body Count



The Marine's tale: 'We killed 30 civilians in six weeks. I felt we were committing genocide'

By Natasha Saulnier

23 May 2004

During 12 years in the US Marines, including three years putting new recruits through boot camp, Staff Sergeant Jimmy Massey hardly questioned his role. But what he saw in Iraq changed that.
"In a month and a half my platoon and I killed more than 30 civilians," Mr Massey said. He saw bodies being desecrated and robbed, and wounded civilians being dumped by the roadside without medical treatment. After he told his commanding officer that he felt "we were committing genocide", he was called a "wimp".

Mr Massey, who was diagnosed with post-traumatic stress and depression, left the Marines in November. Back home in the Smoky Mountains of North Carolina, he says the cause of the uprising in Iraq is that "we killed a lot of innocent people".

His 7th Marine Weapons Company, armed with machine guns and missiles, was one of the first into the country in March last year. "We would take over villages and control checkpoints," he said. "My men and I would fire warning shots at oncoming vehicles. But, if they didn't stop, we didn't have any qualms about loading them up."

The Marines were told that Iraqis were filling ambulances with explosives, and that soldiers were dressed as civilians, but after pouring fire into vehicles and hearing no explosions, they started to doubt the truth of these claims.

"Iraqi military compounds had nothing in them, except for dismantled tanks, equipment that was barely functioning, and barracks that looked like ghost towns," Mr Massey said.

The incident that haunts him most took place early in April, near an Iraqi military compound five miles from Baghdad's airport. "There were approximately 10 demonstrators near a tank," he said. "We heard a shot in the distance and we started shooting at them. They all died except for one. We left the bodies there.

"We noticed that there were some RPGs [rocket-propelled grenades] about 200 metres away from them - they might have come from the military compound. The demonstrators had the ability to fire at us or at the tank, but they didn't. The survivor was hiding behind a column about 150 metres away from us. I pointed at him and waved my weapon to tell him to get away. Half of his foot had been cut off. He went away dragging his foot. We were all laughing and cheering.

"Then an 18-wheeler [truck] came speeding around. We shot at it. One of the guys jumped out. He was on fire. The driver was dead. Then a Toyota Corolla came. We killed the driver, the other guy came out with his hands up. We shot him too.

"A gunny from Lima Company came running and said to us: 'Hey, you just shot that guy, but he had his hands up.' My unit, my commander and me were relieved of our command for the rest of the day. Not more than five minutes later, the Lima Company took up our position and shot a car with one woman and two children. They all died."

The next day the platoon guarded a checkpoint at Baghdad Stadium. "A red Kia Spectra sped toward us at about 45mph. We fired a warning volley above it but the car kept coming. Then we aimed at the car and fired with full force. The Kia came to a stop right in front of me, three of the four men shot dead, the fourth wounded and covered in blood. We called the medics, but he died before they arrived. That day we killed three more civilians in the same circumstances. I talked to my captain afterwards and told him: 'It's a bad day.' He said: 'No, it's a good day.'"

Mr Massey watched as badly injured Iraqis were repeatedly "tossed on the side of the road without calling medics". His reaction to the event that triggered the recent siege of Fallujah - the sight of the blackened, mutilated bodies of four American private security men - was that "we did the same thing to them".

Iraqis, he said, "would see us debase their dead all the time. We would be messing around with charred bodies, kicking them out of the vehicles and sticking cigarettes in their mouths. I also saw vehicles drive over them. It was our job to look into the pockets of dead Iraqis to gather intelligence. However, time and time again, I saw Marines steal gold chains, watches and wallets full of money."

Several members of his platoon expressed concern that so many civilians were being killed, but Mr Massey says he told them: "We've got a job to do." Finally, however, he voiced his own doubts to his commanding officer. "I told him I felt like we were committing genocide in Iraq, that we were doing harm to a culture. He said nothing and walked away. I knew my career was over." Later, he says, his superior poured abuse on him, saying, "You're a poor leader. You're faking it. You're a conscientious objector, you're a wimp."

After being sent back to the US, Mr Massey was offered a desk job. "I had seven years until retirement from the Marine Corps, but I told them I didn't want their money any more," he said. The Marines' slogan - "No better friend, no worse enemy" - now embitters the former sergeant, who says remorse keeps him awake at night.

"One day we would go into a city and set up roadblocks where civilian casualties would take place, and then the next morning we would undertake a humanitarian mission," he said. "How do we expect people who've seen their brothers and mothers killed to turn around and welcome us with open arms?"

Originally from


Forwarded by Phyllis> on May 27

American atrocities against humanity in Iraq

by: Jillian Elizabeth Burgin,
Albuquerque, New Mexico

I saw this picture on the website today and I broke down and cried at my desk.

They say we are at war to free the people of Iraq.
(By killing them?)

We are at war to secure Iraq's economic future.
(By stealing their oil?)

We are at war to rid Iraq of "the evil dictator".
(Which one?)

As this picture so vividly shows, nothing could be further from the truth!

My first thoughts on this, were:

Have the sick twisted FUCKS run out of children to torture, rape and murder in this country? Do we have to go to Iraq to murder more? Are children and civilians in general, no more than rubbish to be put out with the morning's garbage?

So as we ask ourselves, "how did it ever come to this?" we must realize that WE have given away our higher power as human beings-the power of truth, peace, love, and freedom. When we fail to act out of love or turn our back on doing what's right for humanity we give away our power to those entities who thrive upon our energy and use it to manipulate our world. Therefore, we begin to give up our lives and the lives of others.

We MUST remember that we are all one humanity. These are all our people, our children... suffering, dying, because of OUR military action. I ask those that are in all positions of the military to stop your destructive and murderous activity immediately!!! Do the right thing for humanity. We do not need any more mangled and destroyed human lives and bodies from any country.

Isn't it time we evolved?

Isn't it time we did better than this?

It doesn't HAVE to be like this!

I was not alive during the reign of Hitler but I feel the same black shadow cast over us now.

Must we wait for the swastika to crumble before the evil spell is broken?

How high must the pile of bodies become before we realize that we have been lied to and manipulated into committing unspeakable atrocities against humanity?

What if people back then would've done the right thing?

What if people do the right thing now?

What a concept!

Now we have the humiliation of "POWS ON PUBLIC DISPLAY" to the horror of American families that have been lied to. Will that rehearsed, emotionless speech from George W. Bush on how courageous their loved ones were, and how much 'they' mourn their loss, and how indebted America is to the service they've given to their country; give these families any comfort in their time of loss and sorrow? I seriously doubt it. I hope these families realize that their loved ones have become a part of a sick twisted game in which there can be no victory and that in war, everyone loses.

It is sometimes appalling to me, as an embarrassed American, that the arrogance of some of the people in this country has become unfathomable. I seriously believe that most of this pampered generation expected to go to war with Iraq and come home without a scratch.

NEWSFLASH AMERICA: WE ARE ALL HUMAN!!! WE WILL ALL DIE!!! The question we MUST ask however, is what are we really throwing our lives away for?

So is the next step nuclear annihilation? I'm not too arrogant to think that it's not possible. I also don't think it's too late to prevent all our love, hopes, and dreams from going up in a mushroom cloud. But PLEASE ACT NOW!!! Do everything in your power to prevent this. Do not wait for the wrath of God or something that is NOT going to happen. Do not wait for more to die or cause more to die. Listen to your heart and your conscious and stop this destructive and murderous activity immediately!!!

What's the worst that could happen???



Digital Watermarks Prove Berg and Abuse Cameras Were the Same

Alex Jones' Prison Planet | May 25 2004

There are several postings on message boards suggesting that the digital watermarks on the Berg and Abu Ghraib videos are exactly the same. While at this point we have no concrete confirmation of this, it would fit with other examples of how the Berg execution and Abu Ghraib torture scenes are very similar. The contention is that Berg was killed by the US military as a staged psy-op to distract attention from the torture scandal, an execution blamed on 'CIArabs'.

The following is from a Yahoo message board...

Word is spreading around Kodak Park here in Rochester NY. And will break on national News tonight that Kodak film experts have analyzed the Nick Berg video and some of the Abu Grhaib Prison videos comparing them for certain encrypted recording signatures.

Each video camera leaves a certain signature mark, much like a fingerprint or striation markings on bullets in gun barrels. Same goes for CD-ROM Burners, they leave a trace or type of Cookies on the finished product.

These are tested by computer and not visible by the naked eye. Experts here after lunch have concluded that one of the 2 video cameras used in the Nick Berg "beheading" was also used to film US troop abuses of Iraqi detainees.

THIS is BAD news for BushCorp., Military, and CIA.

The following is from another message board, written by Mark Perkel...

The news story of the millennium

Ok - so - the millennium is only 4 years old but - this is still one hell of a story.

Friday, new video was released showing Iraq prisoner torture. The most important piece of information in this video is something that you don't see.

Digital cameras have been built to include a digital watermark that identifies which camera took the video.

I am seeing messages on the Internet who are saying the people at Kodak who developed the watermarking technology have compared the digital watermark on the Berg video with the new prisoner abuse from Abu Ghraib prison and the digital watermark matches one of the two cameras used in the Berg beheading.

If this is true then it means that Americans killed Berg at Abu Ghraib prison.

We need a digital video expert to verify the digital watermarks to prove this is true.


If anyone can shed any light on this matter please E mail us.



Army, CIA want torture truths exposed

By Martin Sieff - UPI Senior News Analyst

WASHINGTON, May 18 (UPI) -- Efforts at the top level of the Bush administration and the civilian echelon of the Department of Defense to contain the Iraq prison torture scandal and limit the blame to a handful of enlisted soldiers and immediate senior officers have already failed: The scandal continues to metastasize by the day.

Over the past weekend and into this week, devastating new allegations have emerged putting Stephen Cambone, the first Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence, firmly in the crosshairs and bringing a new wave of allegations cascading down on the head of Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, when he scarcely had time to catch his breath from the previous ones.

Even worse for Rumsfeld and his coterie of neo-conservative true believers who have run the Pentagon for the past 3¸ years, three major institutions in the Washington power structure have decided that after almost a full presidential term of being treated with contempt and abuse by them, it's payback time.

Those three institutions are: The United States Army, the Central Intelligence Agency and the old, relatively moderate but highly experienced Republican leadership in the United States Senate.

None of those groups is chopped liver: Taken together they comprise a devastating Grand Slam.

The spearhead for the new wave of revelations and allegations - but by no means the only source of them - is veteran investigative journalist Seymour Hersh. In a major article published in the New Yorker this week and posted on to its Web-site Saturday, Hersh revealed that a high-level Pentagon operation code-named Copper Green "encouraged physical coercion and sexual humiliation" of Iraqi prisoners. He also cited Pentagon sources and consultants as saying that photographing the victims of such abuse was an explicit part of the program meant to force the victims into becoming blackmailed reliable informants.

Hersh further claimed in his article that Rumsfeld himself approved the program and that one of his four or five top aides, Cambone, set it up in Baghdad and ran it.

These allegations of course are anathema to the White House, Rumsfeld and their media allies. In a highly unusual step for any newspaper, the editorially neo-conservative tabloid New York Post ran an editorial Monday seeking to ridicule and discredit Hersh. However, it presented absolutely no evidence to query, let alone discredit the substance of his article and allegations.

Instead, the New York Post editorial inadvertently pointed out one, but by no means all, of the major sources for Hersh's information. The editorial alleged that Hersh had received much of his material from the CIA.

Based on the material Hersh quoted, his legendary intelligence community contacts were probably sources for some of his information. However, Hersh has also enjoyed close personal relations with many now high-ranking officers in the United States Army, going all the way back to his prize-winning coverage and scoops in Vietnam more than 30 years ago.

Indeed, intelligence and regular Army sources have told UPI that senior officers and officials in both communities are sickened and outraged by the revelations of mass torture and abuse, and also by the incompetence involved, in the Abu Ghraib prison revelations. These sources also said that officials all the way up to the highest level in both the Army and the Agency are determined not to be scapegoated, or allow very junior soldiers or officials to take the full blame for the excesses.

President George W. Bush in his weekly radio address Saturday claimed that the Abu Ghraib abuses were only "the actions of a few" and that they did not "reflect the true character of the Untied States armed forces."

But what enrages many serving senior Army generals and U.S. top-level intelligence community professionals is that the "few" in this case were not primarily the serving soldiers who were actually encouraged to carry out the abuses and even then take photos of the victims, but that they were encouraged to do so, with the Army's well-established safeguards against such abuses deliberately removed by high-level Pentagon civilian officials.

Abuse and even torture of prisoners happens in almost every war on every side. But well-run professional armies, and the U.S. Army has always been one, take great pains to guard against it and limit it as much as possible. Even in cases where torture excesses are regarded as essential to extract tactical information and save lives, commanders in most modern armies have taken care to limit such "dirty work" to very small units, usually from special forces, and to keep it as secret as possible.

For senior Army professionals know that allowing patterns of abuse and torture to metastasize in any army is annihilating to its morale and tactical effectiveness. Torturers usually make lousy combat soldiers, which is why combat soldiers in every major army hold them in contempt.

Therefore, several U.S. military officers told UPI, the idea of using regular Army soldiers, including some even just from the Army Reserve or National Guard, and encouraging them to inflict such abuses ran contrary to received military wisdom and to the ingrained standards and traditions of the U.S. Army.

The widespread taking of photographs of the victims of such abuses, they said, clearly revealed that civilian "amateurs" and not regular Army or intelligence community professionals were the driving force in shaping and running the programs under which these abuses occurred.

Hersh has spearheaded the waves of revelations of shocking abuse. But other major U.S. media organizations are now charging in behind him to confirm and extend his reports. They are able to do so because many senior veteran professionals in both the CIA and the Army were disgusted by the revelations of the torture excesses. Now they are being listened to with suddenly receptive ears on Capitol Hill.

Republican members in the House of Representatives have kept discipline and silence on the revelations. But with the exception of the increasingly isolated and embarrassed Senate Republican Leader, Bill Frist of Tennessee, other senior mainstream figures in the GOP Senate majority have refused to go along with any cover-up.

Sens. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, Orrin Hatch of Utah, Richard Lugar of Indiana, Pat Roberts of Kansas and John Warner of Virginia have all been outspoken in their condemnation of the torture excesses. And they did so even before the latest, most far-reaching and worst of the allegations and reports surfaced. Warner, chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, lost no time in hauling Rumsfeld before it to testify.

The pattern of the latest wave of revelations is clear: They are coming from significant numbers of senior figures in both the U.S. military and intelligence services. They reflect the disgust and contempt widely felt in both communities at the excesses; and at long last, they are being listened to seriously by senior Republican, as well as Democratic, senators on Capitol Hill.

Rumsfeld and his team of top lieutenants have therefore now lost the confidence, trust and respect of both the Army and intelligence establishments. Key elements of the political establishment even of the ruling GOP now recognize this.

Yet Rumsfeld and his lieutenants remain determined to hang on to power, and so far President Bush has shown every sign of wanting to keep them there. The scandal, therefore, is far from over. The revelations will continue. The cost of the abuses to the American people and the U.S. national interest is already incalculable: And there is no end in sight.


See also:

Could there be a military coup in the US? (18 May 2004)
Reading about the hatred for Rumsfeld in the US military, I realised that these antitheses have all the makings for a military coup in the US. Not quite tanks rolling through Washington, but certainly backroom shenanigans. Bye-bye Rumsfeld. If not maybe tanks will roll through town — after Bush, and the rest of his neo-con gang. But this doesn't sound right. Would the tanks be lefties? Militant democrats, perhaps?



''Fahrenheit 9/11'' finds domestic distributor

June 1, 2004

LOS ANGELES (AP) -- Michael Moore's award-winning documentary "Fahrenheit 9/11" has picked up a U.S. distributor and will hit theaters June 25.

The film will be released by a partnership of Lions Gate Films, IFC Films and the Fellowship Adventure Group, which was formed by Harvey and Bob Weinstein specifically to market Moore's film.

The Weinsteins, who run Miramax Films, bought the rights to the movie from The Walt Disney Co., which owns Miramax and refused to distribute Moore's film.

The Weinstein brothers will personally finance and control distribution and marketing, they said Tuesday.

"I am grateful to them now that everyone who wants to see it will now have the chance to do so," Moore said in a statement.

"On behalf of my stellar cast -- GW, Dick, Rummy, Condi and Wolfie -- we thank this incredible coalition of the willing for bringing 'Fahrenheit 9/11' to the people."

Moore's film, which recently won the top prize at the Cannes Film Festival, attacks President Bush's handling of the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and connects the Bush family with Osama bin Laden's.

Disney chief executive Michael Eisner said the company "did not want a film in the middle of the political process" because he believed that theme park and entertainment consumers "do not look for us to take sides."

In a settlement reached last week, the Weinsteins repaid their parent company for all costs of the film to date, estimated at around $6 million. Any profits from the film's distribution that go to Miramax or Disney will be donated to charity.


See also:

The Great Escape: 300 Saudis in 55 Planes (1 June 2004) evidence shows that the evacuation involved more than the departure of 142 Saudis on six charter flights that the commission is investigating. According to newly released documents, 160 Saudis left the United States on 55 flights immediately after 9/11 - making a total of about 300 people who left with the apparent approval of the Bush administration, far more than has been reported before.


From: "LOVEARTH NETWORK -- Mark R. Elsis">
Subject: Happy 87th Birthday President Kennedy
Date: 29 May 2004

Born: May 29, 1917
Assassinated: November 22, 1963
The 35th President Of The United States

JFK Assassination Stand Down

Army Aid To Help Protect President Kennedy Was Refused

A Military Stand Down Was Ordered On November 22, 1963

Trained U.S. Army Intelligence Units were told their assistance was not needed in Dallas during the JFK visit. William McKinney, a former member of the crack 112th Military Intelligence Group at 4th Army Headquarters, Fort Sam Houston, Texas, has revealed that both Col. Maximillian Reich and his deputy, Lt. Col. Joel Cabaza, protested violently when they were told to "Stand Down" rather than to report with their units for duty in augmentation of the Secret Service in Dallas. McKinney said, "All the Secret Service had to do was nod and these units [which had been trained at the Army's top Intelligence school at Camp Holabird, Maryland] would have performed their normal function of Protection for the President in Dallas."

The 315th, the Texas unit which would have been involved if its support had not been turned down, had records in its files, according to McKinney, on Lee Harvey Oswald. The 315th had a Dallas office and its records were up to date.

McKinney added that, "Highly specialized classes were given at Camp Holabird on the subject of Protection. This included training designed to prepare this army unit to assist the Secret Service. If our support had not been refused, we would have been in Dallas."

The Guns of Dallas

The Reason For The Assassination Was To Control The Power Of The Presidency

by L. Fletcher Prouty

From 1955 to December 31, 1963, Col. L. Fletcher Prouty was the Focal Point (liason) officer between the Pentagon and the CIA. During 1962 and 1963 he was Director of Special Plans (clandestine operations) in the office of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.


Another Little Known Fact

The Secret Service had been lining up the automobiles for the upcoming parade through the streets of the city. Each car was tagged with a small square of paper bearing a number, which indicated the planned position of that particular car in the motorcade. Kennedy was to ride in the open 1961 Lincoln Continental limousine marked with the number "7." But the limousine was placed 2d in line, due apparently to a mix-up.

When the parade started, the Lincoln (sans bubble-top because of Kennedy's own request to leave it off if the weather was nice) was preceded by a 1963 Ford sedan bearing Dallas Police Chief Jesse Curry and other local officials. Directly behind the presidential limousine was the Secret Service's follow-up car a 1959 Cadillac. Although the press vehicle (usually directly in front of the President's car to facilitate photographing the President) was numbered "6," it was lined up last (14th) in the motorcade. For this reason the photographers in that vehicle were unable to photograph any footage of the assassination that was about to occur -- footage that would have been of great evidential value·

Wanted For Treason

A handbill circulated the day before the assassination in Dallas.

John F. Kennedy vs. The Federal Reserve

President Kennedy, The Federal Reserve

And Executive Order 11110

View The Abraham Zapruder Film Showing The Assassination Of John F. Kennedy

"It is our task in our time and in our generation, to hand down undiminished to those who come after us, as was handed down to us by those who went before, the natural wealth and beauty which is ours."

The Most Important News On Earth
Saturday, May 29, 2004

You Can Help Stop The Daily Starvation Of 30,000 Children

Spend two minutes a day at our site where we've put

All the best click to donate for free sites together:

Love Is The Answer

Mark R. Elsis

To Subscribe to our email list:

Send us an email:>

Please write Subscribe in the Subject line

We Publish Hundreds Of Progressive Articles / Links Weekly
We Have Thousands Of Progressive Articles / Links In Our Archive

Connecting Through Eleven Hundred EcoHumanePoliticalSpiritual Websites
To Pass On An Equitable, Peaceful, And Sustainable Earth To Future Generations / Our Network List Of 1100 Websites:


Forwarded by "Mark Graffis">


Report: Iraq being plundered

29 May 2004

A US newspaper reports that military equipment and oil rig parts are being smuggled out of Iraq in a scale tantamount to looting.

"This is systematically plundering the country," John Hamre, of the Washington-based Centre for Strategic and International Studies, was quoted as saying by the New York Times on Friday.

While occupation authorities have approved the removal of scrap metal from Iraq, including thousands of damaged Iraqi tanks, the newspaper said material seen in scrap yards in neighbouring Jordan include new material from Iraq's civil infrastructure.

Stripping infrastructure

Oil rigs and water plants were being stripped of equipment, which then were being carted out of Iraq.

One hundred semitrailers loaded with what is billed as scrap metal arrive in Jordan every day from Iraq bearing legitimate scrap metal, but also inestimable amounts of plundered material, said the paper.

Centre for Strategic and International Studies

The daily said one of its reporters saw "piles of valuable copper and aluminum ingots and bars, large stacks of steel rods and water piper and giant flanges for oil equipment, all in nearly mint condition, as well as chopped-up railroad boxcars, huge numbers of shattered Iraqi tanks and even beer kegs marked with the words "Iraqi Bravery."

The head of the UN International Atomic Energy Agency's verification office in Iraq, Jacques Baute, told the newspaper that satellite photographs the agency uses to monitor hundreds of military-industrial sites for the removal of sensitive material show "jarring" results. Vanishing structures Entire buildings and complexes of as many as a dozen buildings have vanished from the photographs, he said.

"We see sites that have totally been cleaned out," he said. "There is a gigantic salvage operation, stripping of anything of perceived value out of the country," said Hamre.

Sam Whitfield, a spokesman for the Coalition Provisional Authority, however, said the occupation forces had put a stop to widespread looting in Iraq. But a Jordanian engineer at a scrap-yard in Jordan, pointed to items that did not look like scrap at all.

He indicated five-meter long bars of carbon steel, water pipes and large falanges he identified as oil-well equipment. "It's still new and worth a lot," Muhammad al-Dajah said.


See also:

In the Scrapyards of Jordan, Signs of a Looted Iraq
As the United States spends billions of dollars [for Halliburton] 'on Iraq's civil and military infrastructure', there is increasing evidence that parts of sensitive military equipment, seemingly brand-new components for oil rigs and water plants and whole complexes of older buildings are leaving the country on the backs of flatbed trucks. By some estimates, at least 100 semitrailers loaded with what is billed as Iraqi scrap metal are streaming each day into Jordan, just one of six countries that share a border with Iraq.




May 27, 2004


For some time now, I have been searching for answers to a deeply perplexing question: Why is the United States promoting the spread of atomic bombs worldwide?

By "atomic bombs" I mean the kind that turned Hiroshima and Nagasaki into a fiery hell in 1945 -- A-bombs made from plutonium (Nagasaki) or "enriched" uranium (Hiroshima).

In this series, I will briefly examine the facts, then consider some of the possible reasons why the U.S. might favor the proliferation of atomic weapons worldwide.

In at least four different ways, the U.S. is refusing to limit -- and in some cases is actively promoting -- the spread of atomic bombs around the globe.[1]

(1) The U.S. is helping foreign nations acquire nuclear power plants, which everyone acknowledges have provided the basis for A-bomb programs in India, Pakistan, South Africa, North Korea and, during the 1980s, in Iraq.[2] In the hands of a willing nation, nuclear power equals nuclear weapons.

(2) The U.S. is dragging its feet in achieving its stated goal of preventing theft of nuclear weapons within the former Soviet Union.[1]

(3) The U.S. is failing to retrieve 35,000 pounds of weapons-grade uranium that the U.S. loaned or gave to 43 countries during the past 50 years. A crude but effective A-bomb requires 110 pounds (50 kg) of enriched uranium.[3]

(4) President Bush has ordered a fundamental shift in U.S. nuclear weapons policies, initiating what the New York Times calls "the second nuclear age."

These new policies entail (a) creation of a new class of smaller nuclear weapons, (b) guiding small A-bombs to their targets from outer space, (c) reducing the time it takes to launch a nuclear strike, and (d) a new policy of pre-emptive first use of nuclear weapons even against non-nuclear states.

"It is precisely these kinds of provocative new weapons capabilities -- at a time when the administration seeks to prevent proliferation of weapons of mass destruction elsewhere -- that worries even hawkish Republicans," says James Sterngold of the San Francisco Chronicle.[4]

Let's examine each of these four developments in more detail:

I. Nuclear power = nuclear weapons

The U.S. is urging -- and subsidizing -- foreign nations to build new nuclear power plants to generate electricity, while acknowledging that every nuclear power plant certainly provides the stepping stones to A-bombs.

For example, when Vice-President Dick Cheney visited China in April, 2004, he was promoting the sale of Westinghouse nuclear power plants to the Chinese.[5] Current U.S. policy restricts the export of nuclear technology to China but the Bush administration is expected to lift those restrictions in September. The immediate beneficiaries will be Westinghouse and General Electric.[6] China has already announced plans to build 32 nuclear power plants, and to export the technology to other countries. For example, China has said it intends to help Pakistan build two large nuclear power plants capable of producing plutonium.[5]

Within the U.S. itself, in recent months two corporate consortiums have proposed building new nuclear power plants.[7]

President Bush is an enthusiastic supporter of nuclear power.

But nuclear power plants always carry an unspoken danger. For nations that want to build A-bombs, nuclear power provides the basis for all that's needed in the way of technology, opportunity and know-how.

No one disputes this view -- the "nuclear club" has been able to expand only because the spread of nuclear power plants has been encouraged and subsidized. Why does the U.S. continue down this path?

As the New York Times wrote recently, "'If you look at every nation that's recently gone nuclear,' said Mr. [Paul] Leventhal of the Nuclear Control Institute, 'they've done it through the civilian nuclear fuel cycle: Iraq, North Korea, India, Pakistan, South Africa. And now we're worried about Iran.' The moral, he added, is that atoms for peace can be 'a shortcut to atoms for war.'"[8]

The Times goes on, "Today, with what seems like relative ease, scientists can divert an ostensibly peaceful program to make not only electricity but also highly pure uranium or plutonium, both excellent bomb fuels."[8]

And: "Experts now talk frankly about a subject that was once taboo: 'virtual' weapon states - Japan, Germany, Belgium, Canada, Brazil, Kazakhstan, Taiwan and a dozen other countries that have mastered the basics of nuclear power and could, if they wanted, quickly cross the line to make nuclear arms, probably in a matter or months."[8] Experts call crossing that line "breakout."

Other nations thought to have the know-how (though not necessarily the inclination) to cross the breakout line include Egypt, Syria, Nigeria, and South Korea.

The U.S. is on record as vigorously opposing the proliferation of nuclear weapons. However, U.S. actions to prevent proliferation are half-hearted and contradictory at best.[1,9]

For example, when U.S. allies break all the rules and export A-bomb technology, the U.S. looks the other way. Earlier this year, the world was rocked by news that Pakistan's chief nuclear engineer, Abdul Qadeer Khan, had sold a "complete package" of A-bomb technology to Libya, to North Korea, and probably to Iran. The "complete package" included enriched uranium, centrifuges for making more enriched uranium, and one or more designs for A-bombs.[10] Dr. Khan even maintained a telephone support hotline for his A-bomb customers. It was a good business -- Dr. Khan reportedly received more than $100 million from Libya alone.[11]

When Dr. Khan's international smuggling network was discovered, the President of Pakistan, General Pervez Musharraf, forced Dr. Khan to retire as head of Khan Research Laboratories, then turned around and gave him an official pardon, lavished him with praise and gave him the title "special adviser" to the president.[10] According to the New York Times, "...some former and current American officials say there was considerable evidence that General Musharraf was turning a blind eye to Dr. Khan's activities, which they say may have involved parts of the Pakistani military."[12]

The Bush administration did nothing. "Although Mr. Bush has vowed to pursue and prosecute those who spread nuclear weapons technology, the administration did not criticize Mr. Musharraf when he decided to pardon Mr. Khan, who ran what now appears to be one of the largest nuclear proliferation networks in the past half-century."[10]

Did Dr. Khan provide bomb-grade uranium and nuclear know-how to Al Qaeda? "It's mystifying that the administration hasn't leaned on Pakistan to make Dr. Khan available for interrogation to ensure that his network is entirely closed," writes New York Times columnist Nicholas D. Kristof. "Several experts on Pakistan told me they believe that the [U.S.] administration has been so restrained because its top priority isn't combating nuclear proliferation -- it's getting President Pervez Musharraf's help in arresting Osama bin Laden before the November election," Kristof writes.[13]

Pakistan was not the only U.S. ally involved in selling A-bombs to Libya, North Korea and Iran. Dubai in the United Arab Emirates served as the "key transfer point" for all the technology Dr. Khan was selling. Just as the Cayman Islands are known for laundering drug money, Dubai is known for laundering black-market products like A-bomb parts.[14]

When President Bush learned of Dubai's role in Pakistan's atomic shopping mall, he again did nothing. As the scandal was breaking in March, 2004, the Times reported that Lockheed Martin was proceeding with the sale of 80 F-16 fighters to Dubai -- apparently a reward to a trusted and valued ally.[14]

Even when wealthy, technically-savvy governments play strictly by the rules, the civilian nuclear fuel cycle has proven impossible to control. For example, the Japanese acknowledged earlier this year that they have lost 435 pounds of plutonium -- enough to make about 25 nuclear bombs as big as the one that wiped out Nagasaki in 1945. They know they produced it but they have no idea where it went.[15]

So long as the U.S. continues to promote nuclear power for itself and its allies, the fiery hell on earth draws ever closer and more vivid.

I used to think this problem of "nuclear weapons proliferation" was the "Achilles heel" of nuclear power -- the uncontrollable problem that would finally convince the world to stuff the nuclear power genie back into the bottle and never let it out again.

I am now wondering whether I had it exactly backwards: perhaps nuclear weaponry is the main appeal of nuclear power -- both to those who are buying it AND to those who are selling it. (More on this in Part 3.)

II. Turning a Blind Eye to Loose Soviet A-Bombs

The U.S. has continually failed to secure nuclear weapons left over from the cold war in countries of the former Soviet Union. As the New York Times reported in March 2004, "The bipartisan [U.S.] program to secure weapons of mass destruction is starved for funds -- but Mr. Bush is proposing a $41 million cut in 'cooperative threat reduction' with Russia."[13]

"I wouldn't be at all surprised if nuclear weapons are used over the next 15 or 20 years," Bruce Blair, president of the Center for Defense Information, told the New York Times recently, "first and foremost by a terrorist group that gets its hands on a Russian nuclear weapon or a Pakistani nuclear weapon."[13]

There are an estimated 15,000 nuclear weapons in the countries of the former Soviet Union -- 7,000 of them strategic weapons plus an estimated 8,000 tactical weapons.[3] Strategic weapons are the big ones capable of incinerating whole cities. They are covered by disarmament treaties and so have been pretty well inventoried. They are also physically large and protected with several layers of elaborate codes and anti-detonation devices. It would be extremely difficult to steal one and set it off.

But tactical nuclear weapons are a different story. "The most troublesome gap in the generally reassuring assessment of Russian weapons security is those tactical nuclear warheads -- smaller, short-range weapons like torpedoes, depth charges, artillery shells, mines. Although their smaller size and greater number makes them ideal candidates for theft, they have gotten far less attention simply because, unlike all of our long-range weapons, they happen not to be the subject of any formal treaty," says the New York Times.[3]

The commonly-used estimate of 8,000 tactical nukes is "an educated guess," says the Times. Other estimates range from a low of 4,000 to a high of 32,000 tactical A-bombs. Even the Russians don't seem to have a reliable inventory.[3]

"The other worrying thing about tactical nukes is that their anti-use devices are believed to be less sophisticated, because the weapons were designed to be employed in the battlefield. Some of the older systems are thought to have no permissive action links at all, so that setting one off would be about as complicated as hot-wiring a car," says the Times.[3]

But stealing a nuclear weapon may not be the easiest way for a terrorist group to join the nuclear club.

Bill Keller, who wrote the eye-opening article, "Nuclear Nightmares" for the New York Times magazine two years ago, says, "The closest thing I heard to consensus among those who study nuclear terror was this: building a nuclear bomb is easier than you think, probably easier than stealing one."[3]

III. Sluggish Response to Weapons-Grade Uranium

So the third way that the U.S. is promoting the spread of atomic bombs is by failing to retrieve the weapons-grade enriched uranium that the U.S. sent abroad during the past 50 years.

Here is the opening paragraph from a New York Times story March, 7, 2004: "As the United States presses Iran and other countries to shut down their nuclear weapons development programs, government auditors have disclosed that the United States is making little effort to recover large quantities of weapons-grade uranium -- enough to make roughly 1,000 nuclear bombs -- that the government dispersed to 43 countries over the last several decades," including Iran and Pakistan.[16]

Why would President Bush fiddle around in the face of a threat as serious and obvious as this one?

--Peter Montague
[To be continued.]

[1] This newsletter was written before the New York Times
editorialized as follows on May 28, 2004:
"While the Bush administration has been distracted by the invasion and occupation of Iraq, it has neglected the far more urgent threat to American security from dangerous nuclear materials that must be safeguarded before they can fall into the hands of terrorists. That is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from a new report that documents the slow pace of protecting potential nuclear bomb material at loosely guarded sites around the world.

"The report -- prepared by researchers at the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard -- does not directly blame the invasion of Iraq for undermining that effort. It simply notes that less nuclear material was secured in the two years immediately after the 9/11 attacks than in the two years before....

"The most plausible explanation is that the administration has focused so intensely on Iraq, which posed no nuclear threat, that it had little energy left for the real dangers. Indeed, the Harvard researchers said that if a tenth of the effort and resources devoted to Iraq in the last year was devoted to securing nuclear material wherever it might be, the job could be accomplished quickly."

[2] In early June, 1981, Israel bombed a nuclear power plant under construction in Iraq, asserting that Iraq intended it for making A-bombs. See Steven R. Weisman, "Reagan Asserts Israel Had Cause To Mistrust Iraq: Senate Panel Not Convinced," New York Times June 17, 1981. pg. A1.

[3] Bill Keller, "Nuclear Nightmares," New York Times May 26, 2002.

[4] James Sterngold, "A new era of nuclear weapons: Bush's buildup begins with little debate in Congress," San Francisco Chronicle Dec. 7, 2003.

[5] H. Josef Hebert, "Cheney to shop Westinghouse nuke technology to China," Salt Lake City (Utah) Tribune April 10, 2004.

[6] Reuters, "Asian countries in race for nuclear power," Economic Times [of India] April 11, 2004.

[7] "A 2nd Consortium Wants a Reactor," New York Times April 1, 2004.

[8] William J. Broad, "Nuclear Weapons in Iran: Plowshare or Sword," New York Times (Science Section) May 25, 2004.

[9] "Editorial: Half a Proliferation Program," New York Times Feb. 16, 2004.

[10] David E. Sanger, "U.S. Widens Its View of Pakistan Link to Korean Arms," New York Times Mar. 14, 2004.

[11] David E. Sanger and William J. Broad, "Pakistani's Nuclear Earnings: $100 Million," New York Times Mar. 16, 2004.

[12] David Rohde and Talat Hussain, "Delicate Dance for Musharraf In Nuclear case," New York Times Feb. 8, 2004.

[13] Nicholas D. Kristof, "A Nuclear 9/11," New York Times Mar. 10, 2004.

[14] Gary Milhollin and Kelly Motz, "OpEd: Nukes 'R' Us," New York Times Mar. 4, 2004.

[15] Bayan Rahman, "Japan Loses 206 kg of Plutonium," New York Times Jan. 28, 2003.

[16] Joel Brinkley and William J. Broad, "U.S. Lags in Recovering Fuel Suitable for Nuclear Arms," New York Times Mar. 7, 2004.


See also:

A Real Nuclear Danger (28 May 2004)
While the Bush administration has been distracted by the invasion and occupation of Iraq, it has neglected the far more urgent threat to American security from dangerous nuclear materials that must be safeguarded before they can fall into the hands of terrorists. That is the inescapable conclusion to be drawn from a new report that documents the slow pace of protecting potential nuclear bomb material at loosely guarded sites around the world. (...) Fortunately, the administration has begun accelerating its efforts in at least one critical area. This week, the energy secretary, Spencer Abraham, announced a $450 million campaign to retrieve nuclear materials that the United States and the Soviet Union had sent around the world for research purposes. Highly enriched uranium is scattered at some 130 research reactors in more than 40 countries, often guarded by little more than a night watchman and a chain-link fence. Dozens of these sites have enough material to make a bomb. The accelerated retrieval effort has rightly been praised by groups seeking to control nuclear proliferation, but many experts warn that more needs to be done to speed up a process that will take years to complete.  The biggest danger point remains Russia, where huge stockpiles of nuclear weapons and materials usable in weapons became vulnerable to theft and smuggling with the breakup of the Soviet Union. Although the United States and Russia are cooperating on a program to safeguard dangerous materials and have fixed some of the most glaring vulnerabilities, only a fifth of the dangerous nuclear material not in weapons has been protected by comprehensive security upgrades, an appallingly sluggish performance. The effort has been slowed by clashes over American access to critical sites and arguments over who would be liable in an accident. Meanwhile, an ambitious campaign begun by the G-8 nations to prevent the spread of weapons of mass destruction has been slow to get off the ground, despite pledges of $10 billion from the United States and $7 billion from other nations.  Faster progress will require the sustained, personal involvement of Presidents George Bush and Vladimir Putin, who have the power to sweep away bureaucratic obstacles. They need to make the issue a priority when the G-8 meets next month.


Date: 02 Jun 2004
Subject: Put it to the Politicians

Action & News Club

June 2, 2004

From the desk of Mel Hurtig

Founder and past chairman of the Council of Canadians, and an officer of the Order of Canada

The American and Canadian governments are intentionally misleading us about:

* the Pentagon's unprecedented plans to weaponize space

* the huge new Russian and Chinese nuclear missile buildup resulting from U.S. Star Wars plans

* the destruction of vitally important, long-standing arms control agreements

* the rapidly increasing danger of a nuclear apocalypse

We can't let them get away with this deception. That's why I hope you'll join me to "Put it to the Politicians" right now at

This is a new election tool at and I'm proud to support this democratic action. Go to right now and you can "Put it to the Politicians" by sending them a series of probing questions on peace issues and, of course, demanding a response.

Let's be frank -- anyone who is familiar with Bush's new Star Wars plan knows that it's really about establishing a U.S. first-strike-capability- from-space, and that official U.S. documents reveal their plans are to dominate space.

Folks, this is scary stuff.That's what I discovered when researching my new book, Rushing to Armageddon, to be published this summer.

But it gets even scarier. Both Paul Martin's Liberals and Stephen Harper's Conservatives want to join in George W. Bush's dangerous missile defence program.

Yet we know that an Ipsos-Reid poll conducted for the Polaris Institute showed that seven out of ten Canadians do not support missile defence. Canadians want our country to be independent of American domination, we want Canada to support multilateralism, and we want to preserve our own values and quality of life.

If we fail to fight those who would further subjugate Canada to the United States, the consequences will be grave.

The missile defence plan could mean the placement of missiles on Canadian soil, or turning the Canadian Artic into a missile firing range. It could mean the weaponization of space. And it will certainly mean a more dangerously armed world.

That's why I'm asking you to take action today at, where you can "Put it to the Politicians." The questions are straightforward. You cannot ask a simpler question than "If elected will you work to ensure that Canada does not participate in the Bush administration's missile defence system?"

And make sure to tell them that your vote is riding on their response and an honest answer.

Remember, two-thirds of Canadians say that maintaining the sovereignty of Canada is the most important challenge facing our country, and only eight per cent want us to become more like the United States.

That's why it's so important that you join me to "Put it to the Politicians" at right now. And once you've "Put it to the Politicians" then I ask that you consider making a donation to so we can continue this vital work.

I'm sure you'll agree with me that as a proud and independent Canada we should be playing a much greater role in the United Nations, we should promote peace and disarmament, and we should reject global dominance in all its forms.

If you agree with me then let's say it loud and clear.

Paul Martin is right about one thing, this election is about what kind of country we want. So go to to "Put it to the Politicians" right now. Ask them: "What vision do you have of Canada's role in the world, and within the United Nations?"

Those of us who love our country, who value our freedom to chart our own future, those of us with children and grandchildren that we want to grow up to be Canadian, must do much more to protect our wonderful country.

So "Put it to the Politicians" right now at, then make your donation.

Sincerely yours,

Mel Hurtig, O.C. Author

P.S. This election is about what kind of Canada you want, so "Put it to the Politicians" right now at But don't stop there. Tell your friends, family and colleagues about "Put it to the Politicians." And please consider a donation for the peace and social justice work of


Donations and inquiries may be directed to: Polaris Institute / Attn. Carole Pharand, Administrator 312 Cooper Street / Ottawa ON K2P 0G7 tel. 613 237-1717 / fax. 613 237-3359 /

Mel Hurtig's newest book, Rushing to Armageddon (McClelland & Stewart), will be in bookstores this summer. But you can pre-order your copy through today.


If you would like to subscribe to the Earth Rainbow Network automated listserver and regularly receive similar compilations covering a broad range of subjects, including each new Meditation Focus issued every two week, simply send a blank email at from the email account to which you want to receive the material compiled and networked by the Earth Rainbow Network Coordinator. Subscription is FREE!